The Constitutional Court initiated a case on the right of an individual to receive reimbursed medicinal products and medical equipment
On 8 June 2012, the First Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated a case “On Compliance of Para 841 and 89 of the 31 October 2006 Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 899 “Procedures for the Reimbursement of Expenditures for the Acquisition of Medicinal Products and Medicinal Devices Intended for Out-patient Medical Treatment” with Article 91[1] and Article 111[2] of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
Contested Norms
Para 841 of the 31 October 2006 Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 899 “Procedures for the Reimbursement of Expenditures for the Acquisition of Medicinal Products and Medicinal Devices Intended for Out-patient Medical Treatment” provides: if a patient, in the frameworks of reimbursement procedure, previously has not received medicinal products or medicinal devices established in the list A in respect to a particular diagnosis, a medical practitioner shall prescribe it using a special form of prescription and indicating the general title of the medicinal product or the medicinal device.
Para 89 establishes, however, that the duty of a pharmacist is to dispense the cheapest reimbursable medicinal products, which conform with this name, the prescribed pharmaceutical form and strength.
The Facts
The applicants, namely, twenty members of the Saeima [Parliament] of the Republic of Latvia hold that after 1 January 2012 when the Contested Norms came into force, patients with the same diagnosis were divided into two groups, whilst the procedure for reimbursement of expenses for purchase of medicinal products differed.
The applicants indicate that application of the Contested Norms to one of these groups, first-time patients fail to comply with the principle of equality. The Contested Norms establish a different attitude towards persons enjoying equal and, according to certain criteria, comparable circumstances; moreover, such attitude is neither objective nor reasonable. Measures applied to reach the legitimate aim of the norms are not proportional.
Legal Proceedings
The Saeima was asked to provide, before 8 August 2012, a reply on the facts of the case and legal substantiation thereof.
The term of preparation of the case is 8 November 2012.
[1] Article 91 of the Satversme: „All human beings in Latvia shall be equal before the law and the courts. Human rights shall be realised without discrimination of any kind.”
[2] Article 111 of the Satversme: „The State shall protect human health and guarantee a basic level of medical assistance for everyone.”
Linked case: 2012-14-03